LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 05.AUG.2000 (04) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
  L O W L A N D S - L * 05.AUG.2000 (04) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
  Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
  Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
  User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
  Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
  =======================================================================
  A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
  LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
  =======================================================================

From: Henry Pijffers [hpijffers at home.nl]
Subject: LL-L: "Etymology" LOWLANDS-L, 05.AUG.2000 (01) [D/E]

Roger hef schreven:
>
>In Dutch we have "Koeterwaals" and "Koeteren": they may be linked to küern

>(???)
>
I've never heard of  "koeteren" before, but I guess it's derived from
"Koeterwaals".
Much like somebody else explained before that "to burgle" was derived from
"burglar".

Ron hef schreven:
>
>Most people may not see any difference between "orthography" and
>"spelling."  To me there is a slight difference.  In "orthography" I
>include both spelling and punctuation.  I use it to refer to the entire
>*system* of representing speech graphically.  I can see that you could use

>"spelling" like that too, but to me "spelling" refers more to the
lettering
>of words, singly or in a row, not so much or not at all rules of
>punctuation.  Thus, I would say "The spelling of five of the words is
>incorrect" rather than *"The orthography of five of the words is
>incorrect."  I don't know if this is an idiosyncracy of mine.
>
In Dutch "spelling" includes punctuation as well. Maybe the word has a
different
meaning in the languages that use it?

>I don't think there is a Low Saxon (Low Saxon) cognate of German
>_Rechtschreibung_, which may be food for thought (considering that the
>language does not have a standard orthography).  In Germany we say
>_Schrievwies'_ ['Sri:v,vi:.z] "way of writing."  I assume it is _spelling_

>in Low Saxon of the Netherlands.  Correct?
>
I use both. I use "spelling" and "schriefwies" (or "schrievwies", depending
on
your preference of spelling).

Ron hef ok schreven as reaktie op Roger:
>
>> Is küern a standard Low German variant for "talk"?
>
>No.
>
>I assume by "standard" you mean "usual" or "wide-spread" in this case,
>considering the fact that Low Saxon does not have a standard variety as
>yet.
>
>Words for 'to talk' divide the Low Saxon dialects into some sort of
>groups.  _Küern_, _küren_, _küürn_, _küre_, etc., right away give away
that
>you speak a southwestern dialect.  The predominant word in Northern Low
>Saxon is _snacken_ ['snak=N], which has also been borrowed by Danish as
_at
>snakke_, a less formal way of saying _at tale_ with the added component
'to
>chat', just like Low Saxon _snacken_.  (I am assuming that Danish borrowed

>it from Low Saxon and it wasn't the other way around).  In the
northwestern
>dialects, especially in those of Eastern Friesland, it is _praten_ (also
>spelled _proten_, _proaten_ or _praoten_), like Dutch _praten_ and
>Afrikaans _praat_.  And then there is _spreken_ ~ _spräken_ ['spre:k=N] ~
>['sprE:k=N], which you find used more in Eastphalian and Eastern dialects.

>The predominant way for 'to converse', 'to chat', 'to shoot the breeze' is

>_klönen_ [klø:n:].  It has filtered into Northern German via Missingsch.
>Then there is a great number of words denoting 'to talk' in different
ways,
>too many words to list in my answer to your question.
>
You're right about the southwestern dialect. In my dialect küern is the
predominant
word for "to talk" (not only casual), although it's usually spelled ku^ern
(^ above u), and
pronounced more like as in Dutch "kuieren" (it's always nice to confuse
them with it),
or like "köier'n" (phonetically). It's surely not pronounced like "küern"
implies.
Besides that, we use "praten" and "sprekken". Of "klönen" I've never heard
before,
so are you sure it is so "predominant" like you say it is?

grooten,
Henry

==================================END===================================
  You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
  request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
  as message text from the same account to
  <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
  <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
  =======================================================================
  * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
  * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
  * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
  * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
    to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
    <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
  * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
    type of format, in your submissions
  =======================================================================